Disposed

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) v. Ritesh Vinod Shivotia

DRT6 Feb 2024OA/326/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an interlocutory application for withdrawal of the Original Application due to an out-of-court settlement between the applicant bank and the borrower, dismissing the suit as withdrawn and directing a refund of court fees.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the Original Application; it stands dismissed as withdrawn; court fees to be refunded.

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Ritesh Vinod Shivotia — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶3

Sr. No.22

¶4

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.134 of 2024 In ORIGINAL APPLICATION (D) NO.5 of 2021

¶5

Bank of Baroda … Applicant Versus

¶6

Ritesh Vinod Shivotia … Defendant

¶7

Mr Madhur Rai i/b M/s. PRS Legal – Advocates for the applicant. None for defendant.

¶8

Shri Deepak M. Thakkar Presiding Officer, 6^th February 2024.

¶9

ORDER

¶10

Mr Rai submits that the parties have amicably settled the matter for the amount in the sum of Rs.1.30 crores in full and final satisfaction of the applicant’s claim. It is stated that court fee is not debited from the borrower’s account and therefore, is entitled for refund. Mr Rai seeks the Tribunal’s permission to withdraw the Original Application. Permission granted. Interlocutory Application No.134 of 2024 is allowed with no order as to costs.

¶11

Sd/-

¶12

(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶13

Nidhi

¶14

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶15

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

ORDER SHEET

06.02.2024

Sr. No.22

		OA(D)No.5 of 2021
classifi -cation	No. of Exh.	Bank of Baroda Vs. Ritesh Vinod Shivotia
		Mr Madhur Rai i/b M/s. PRS Legal – Advocates for the applicant. None for defendant.
	6	1. Mr Rai has presented I.A. No.134 of 2024 supported by affidavit (exhibit-6), which is taken on record. 2. Order in I.A. No.134 of 2024 passed separately.
		3. In view of order passed in I.A. No.134 of 2024,
		Original Application (D) No.5 of 2021 stands dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs. 4. The learned Registrar is directed to refund the court fees as per the Rules. 5. The learned Registrar is directed to register the Original Application. 6. All pending IAs, if any, stands disposed of.
		Sd/- Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶20

Nidhi

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) v. Ritesh Vinod Shivotia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) v. Ritesh Vinod Shivotia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dimple Arcade Premises Chsl versus Union Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus Anand M Chaturvedi

Bairi Rakesh Ramchandram versus the Mogaveera Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Bank of India versus M/s Anita Embroidery Enterprises

Bank of India versus M/s Yogita Fusion Enterprise

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Santosh Sarda